Timothy R. Martin v. Scott & Stringfellow, Incorporated

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-1787
TIMOTHY R. MARTIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SCOTT & STRINGFELLOW, INCORPORATED,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:08-cv-00417-REP)
Submitted: November 17, 2009 Decided: November 19, 2009
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy R. Martin, Appellant Pro Se. David Edward Constine,
III, Laura Denise Windsor, TROUTMAN & SANDERS, LLP, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Timothy R. Martin appeals the district court’s adverse
grant of summary judgment and dismissal of his civil employment
discrimination and retaliation case. The sole issue Martin
raises on appeal is a challenge to the district court’s
discovery ruling relative to the production of certain email
messages. We affirm.
We review a district court’s denial of a motion to
allow further discovery before ruling on a summary judgment
motion under an abuse of discretion standard. Strag v. Bd. of
Trs., 55 F.3d 943, 952-53 (4th Cir. 1995); Nguyen v. CNA Corp.,
44 F.3d 234, 242 (4th Cir. 1995). Here, where it is evident
that the district court thoroughly considered Martin’s request
for the information and discussed the availability of the
information with opposing counsel before determining that the
information was not subject to production, we cannot find that
the district court abused its discretion.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s discovery
ruling, and further affirm its dismissal of Martin’s case on
summary judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --